12Fr-Pigtail Versus 14Fr-Balloon Percutaneous Radiologic Gastrostomy (PRG), Retrospective Evaluation of Outcomes and Complications; A Maastricht University Medical Centre Study.
12Fr-pigtail tubes
14Fr-balloon tubes
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG)
Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG)
Journal
Cardiovascular and interventional radiology
ISSN: 1432-086X
Titre abrégé: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003538
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
20
03
2023
accepted:
25
07
2023
medline:
4
9
2023
pubmed:
18
8
2023
entrez:
17
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To retrospectively compare tube and placement related results of a 12Fr-pigtail and a 14Fr-balloon gastrostomy tube. All consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy (PRG) between January 2016 and June 2020 were enrolled in this retrospective single-center analysis. Follow-up for all patients was 180 days. Mortality after 30 days, technical success, days to first complication within 180 days, reason of unexpected visit (tube, anchor or pain related), and tube specific complications (obstruction, pain, luxation, leakage) were taken as outcome measures. Data were obtained from both PACS software and electronic health records. A total of 247 patients were enrolled (12Fr-pigtail: n = 139 patients and 14Fr-balloon: n = 108 patients). 30-day mortality was very low in both groups and never procedure related. Technical success was 99% in both groups. The average number of complications within 180 days after initial PRG placement was significantly higher in the 12Fr-pigtail group (12Fr-pigtail: 0.93 vs. 14Fr-balloon: 0.64, p = 0.028). Time to first complication within 180 days was significantly longer in the 14Fr-balloon group (12Fr-pigtail: 29 days vs. 14Fr-balloon: 53 days, p = 0.005). In the 14Fr-balloon group, the rate of tube-related complications (luxation and obstruction) was significantly lower compared to 12Fr-pigtail (29% vs. 45%, p = 0.011). 14Fr-balloon gastrostomy tubes have significantly lower (tube-related) complications rates and longer time to first complication compared to 12Fr-pigtail tubes. No procedure-related mortality was observed in either group. Technical success was very high in both groups. Level of Evidence Level 3, non-controlled retrospective cohort study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37592019
doi: 10.1007/s00270-023-03527-6
pii: 10.1007/s00270-023-03527-6
pmc: PMC10471621
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1231-1237Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Molina Villalba C, Vazquez Rodriguez JA, Gallardo SF. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy. Indications, care and complications. Med Clin (Barc). 2019;152(6):229–36.
doi: 10.1016/j.medcli.2018.09.008
pubmed: 30424936
Rahnemai-Azar AA, Rahnemaiazar AA, Naghshizadian R, Kurtz A, Farkas DT. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: indications, technique, complications and management. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(24):7739–51.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i24.7739
pubmed: 24976711
pmcid: 4069302
Ho SG, Marchinkow LO, Legiehn GM, Munk PL, Lee MJ. Radiological percutaneous gastrostomy. Clin Radiol. 2001;56(11):902–10.
doi: 10.1053/crad.2001.0782
pubmed: 11603893
Perona F, Castellazzi G, De Iuliis A, Rizzo L. Percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy: a 12-year series. Gut Liver. 2010;4(Suppl 1):S44–9.
doi: 10.5009/gnl.2010.4.S1.S44
pubmed: 21103294
pmcid: 2989545
Shin JH, Park AW. Updates on percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy/gastrojejunostomy and jejunostomy. Gut Liver. 2010;4(Suppl 1):S25-31.
doi: 10.5009/gnl.2010.4.S1.S25
pubmed: 21103291
pmcid: 2989547
Wollman B, D’Agostino HB, Walus-Wigle JR, Easter DW, Beale A. Radiologic, endoscopic, and surgical gastrostomy: an institutional evaluation and meta-analysis of the literature. Radiology. 1995;197(3):699–704.
doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480742
pubmed: 7480742
Strijbos D, Keszthelyi D, Gilissen LPL, Lacko M, Hoeijmakers JGJ, van der Leij C, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding: a retrospective analysis on outcomes and complications. Endosc Int Open. 2019;7(11):E1487–95.
doi: 10.1055/a-0953-1524
pubmed: 31673622
pmcid: 6811353
Funaki B, Zaleski GX, Lorenz J, Menocci PB, Funaki AN, Rosenblum JD, et al. Radiologic gastrostomy placement: pigtail- versus mushroom-retained catheters. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175(2):375–9.
doi: 10.2214/ajr.175.2.1750375
pubmed: 10915678
Lee MJ, Fanelli F, Haage P, Hausegger K, Van Lienden KP. Patient safety in interventional radiology: a CIRSE IR checklist. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35(2):244–6.
doi: 10.1007/s00270-011-0289-5
pubmed: 22011783
Pinar-Gutierrez A, Serrano-Aguayo P, Garcia-Rey S, Vazquez-Gutierrez R, Gonzalez-Navarro I, Tatay-Dominguez D, et al. Percutaneous radiology gastrostomy (PRG)-associated complications at a tertiary hospital over the last 25 years. Nutrients. 2022;14(22):4838.
doi: 10.3390/nu14224838
pubmed: 36432521
pmcid: 9694556
Kuo YC, Shlansky-Goldberg RD, Mondschein JI, Stavropoulos SW, Patel AA, Solomon JA, et al. Large or small bore, push or pull: a comparison of three classes of percutaneous fluoroscopic gastrostomy catheters. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(4):557–63 (quiz 64).
doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2007.09.027
pubmed: 18375301
Strijbos D, Keszthelyi D, Bogie RMM, Gilissen LPL, Lacko M, Hoeijmakers JGJ, et al. A Systematic review and meta-analysis on outcomes and complications of percutaneous endoscopic versus radiologic gastrostomy for enteral feeding. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2018;52(9):753–64.
doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001082
pubmed: 29924079
Mohamed Elfadil O, Linch FB, Seegmiller SL, Hurt RT, Mundi MS, Neisen MJ. Safety and effectiveness of radiologic and endoscopic percutaneous gastrostomy placement: a randomized study. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2022;46(8):1808–17.
doi: 10.1002/jpen.2365
pubmed: 35428993
Galaski A, Peng WW, Ellis M, Darling P, Common A, Tucker E. Gastrostomy tube placement by radiological versus endoscopic methods in an acute care setting: a retrospective review of frequency, indications, complications and outcomes. Can J Gastroenterol. 2009;23(2):109–14.
doi: 10.1155/2009/801925
pubmed: 19214286
pmcid: 2694590
Sethupathi S, Walter K, Lim M, Fang A. Retrospective analysis of the safety and outcomes of percutaneous radiologic gastrostomy in obese vs nonobese patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2021;45(8):1714–9.
doi: 10.1002/jpen.2075
pubmed: 33433937